Post by SEFootball on Feb 1, 2007 11:43:22 GMT
I've been a part of a staff now going on about 10 years and the offense we are running is one that I inherited.
Over the years, especially over the past four where I've been in an OC position I've added to what we do, but in general have kept the foundation.
Recently I've come to to really think that from a blocking perspective we may need to look at some subtle changes and would like to hear the opinion of those on this board.
Specifically...we run the split back veer (everything is called with the only read being an option off of one of men on the line of scrimmage).
To complement the inside quick hit action of the veer we also run a quick toss action off the edge (typical of most veer teams).
Here is what I've been thinking...we have a number of plays that feed off of the traditional veer blocking scheme. Everyone blocks down leaving the LMOLOS unblocked. You'll get your doubles to backers and then you'll either read that last man or you'll have some form of blocking heading his way.
On the flip side when we run things outside of the LMOLOS we typically hook this guy.
For the teams that we play that (a) scout us well and (b) have pretty good athletes I'm feeling this is presenting more and more of a problem as I think it tends to make the job of coaching up that DE easier. To some extent I think to the point that a kid that isn't that great can play better than normal.
IOW, I could see a DC saying if they block down, step down, something is coming inside, if they try to hook/reach you, fight like heck, because something is coming outside of you.
Our veer and quick toss action which essentially have either blocking down or a hook block occurring will stay constant.
Where I'm looking for the opinion is on our counter/counter trey action...here we have veer blocking to the play side while pulling either our bsg or bsg and bst. Either way the bst is looking to kick out the LMOLOS.
The problem is that I think that given what we do our base plays tend to hinder the development of this play as the point of attack is similar to the veer. So we have guards getting caught in traffic at the POA and ultimately very little running space for our backs.
My thought is to change this blocking scheme to a situation where our TE or T look to arc release on the LMOLOS and typically head to a safety.
I think that by doing this we'll get the following...(a) the DE widening initially due to the threat of the hook and possible quick outside play.
(b) this will ultimately open a bit more room inside for both the RB and the pulling guard. Ultimately I think this will be at least one play that breaks the blocking scheme tendency and puts more pressure on the defense to coach up their DE to play sound ball as opposed to simply reacting to the man he's lining up against.
Following with this same thought...in our trap scheme we typically block down on the play side and have the center fill while we pull our guard and trap the DT.
What about pulling both guards towards the play...thoughts on how that would potentially widen that DT again based on similar thought process of above. Seems like this would give potentially a better target to my pulling guard and more space for my RB...unless the team slanted.
thanks.
Over the years, especially over the past four where I've been in an OC position I've added to what we do, but in general have kept the foundation.
Recently I've come to to really think that from a blocking perspective we may need to look at some subtle changes and would like to hear the opinion of those on this board.
Specifically...we run the split back veer (everything is called with the only read being an option off of one of men on the line of scrimmage).
To complement the inside quick hit action of the veer we also run a quick toss action off the edge (typical of most veer teams).
Here is what I've been thinking...we have a number of plays that feed off of the traditional veer blocking scheme. Everyone blocks down leaving the LMOLOS unblocked. You'll get your doubles to backers and then you'll either read that last man or you'll have some form of blocking heading his way.
On the flip side when we run things outside of the LMOLOS we typically hook this guy.
For the teams that we play that (a) scout us well and (b) have pretty good athletes I'm feeling this is presenting more and more of a problem as I think it tends to make the job of coaching up that DE easier. To some extent I think to the point that a kid that isn't that great can play better than normal.
IOW, I could see a DC saying if they block down, step down, something is coming inside, if they try to hook/reach you, fight like heck, because something is coming outside of you.
Our veer and quick toss action which essentially have either blocking down or a hook block occurring will stay constant.
Where I'm looking for the opinion is on our counter/counter trey action...here we have veer blocking to the play side while pulling either our bsg or bsg and bst. Either way the bst is looking to kick out the LMOLOS.
The problem is that I think that given what we do our base plays tend to hinder the development of this play as the point of attack is similar to the veer. So we have guards getting caught in traffic at the POA and ultimately very little running space for our backs.
My thought is to change this blocking scheme to a situation where our TE or T look to arc release on the LMOLOS and typically head to a safety.
I think that by doing this we'll get the following...(a) the DE widening initially due to the threat of the hook and possible quick outside play.
(b) this will ultimately open a bit more room inside for both the RB and the pulling guard. Ultimately I think this will be at least one play that breaks the blocking scheme tendency and puts more pressure on the defense to coach up their DE to play sound ball as opposed to simply reacting to the man he's lining up against.
Following with this same thought...in our trap scheme we typically block down on the play side and have the center fill while we pull our guard and trap the DT.
What about pulling both guards towards the play...thoughts on how that would potentially widen that DT again based on similar thought process of above. Seems like this would give potentially a better target to my pulling guard and more space for my RB...unless the team slanted.
thanks.